Carpentier, P. A., Stanford, J. B., & Boyle, P. C. (2016). Progesterone in Women with Recurrent Miscarriages. The New England Journal of Medicine, 374(9), 894. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1600491
Carpentier PA, Stanford JB, Boyle PC. Progesterone in Women with Recurrent Miscarriages. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(9):894. doi:10.1056/NEJMc1600491
Carpentier, P. A., et al. "Progesterone in Women with Recurrent Miscarriages." The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 374, no. 9, 2016, pp. 894.
This is a letter and reply about the PROMISE trial. The trial tested progesterone for women with repeat miscarriage of no known cause. Almost a third of screened women had fertility problems. They were left out of the trial. Progesterone began only after implantation. The trial authors say they tested current practice. They did not test earlier treatment timing.
Key Findings
PROMISE trial screening excluded 515 of 1568 women (nearly 33%) because of fertility problems. So its findings speak mainly to women who got pregnant without treatment.
In PROMISE, progesterone was started after implantation was confirmed, a pattern the letter's authors say differs from typical fertility-treatment protocols that start earlier.
The trial authors state women who did not conceive naturally within one year after enrollment were ineligible for randomization, confirming women with fertility problems were excluded.
The trial authors say no accepted histologic, biochemical, proteomic, or genomic test currently exists to identify luteal-phase defect, calling a short cycle only a crude marker.
The trial authors agree that testing progesterone during the luteal phase in unexplained recurrent miscarriage is an important question requiring further research.
Interpretation
This is expert commentary: a letter about the PROMISE trial, plus the trial authors' reply. PROMISE tested progesterone in the first trimester for women with unexplained repeat miscarriage who got pregnant without fertility treatment. Women with fertility problems were left out. Progesterone started only after implantation. The letter argues these design choices limit what PROMISE can say about earlier progesterone, given before or at implantation. The trial authors agree this question needs more research. They say there is no accepted way to diagnose luteal-phase defect, and call a short cycle only a rough marker of it. Neither piece reports new outcome data.
RRM Context
Two of the letter's authors work with the International Institute for Restorative Reproductive Medicine. This group trains doctors to time progesterone to a woman's own cycle. The timing is tied to ovulation and implantation. Their letter reflects that idea: cycle-timed progesterone may work differently than progesterone timed to a pregnancy test. PROMISE did not test that timing question. The exchange does not answer it either.
Our editorial summary of this paper, not the article's abstract.
Minjeur M et al., 2026·Journal of Restorative Reproductive Medicine·Free to read
Infertility is a clinical condition that is recognized by the symptom of an inability to conceive through sexual intercourse or to sustain a pregnancy, with that symptom indicating underlying male and/or female pathology.
This definition of infertility was developed through a structured, consensus-informed process involving broad stakeholder engagement. Initially, multiple definitions currently used by various medical professional organizations were reviewed, and a definition document was drafted and submitted to the Board of Directors of the International Institute for Restorative Reproductive Medicine (IIRRM). All IIRRM members were invited to provide feedback on the draft. Approximately 2,500 individuals and 44 organizations from 92 countries were then invited to review the proposed document, representing clinical, scientific, patient, policy, and advocacy perspectives. Submitted comments were reviewed thematically, with suggested revisions evaluated for clarity, clinical relevance, inclusiveness, and consistency with contemporary restorative reproductive medicine. Following this review, 3 substantive changes, 18 minor changes, and 15 citation corrections were incorporated into the final draft which resulted in a revised definition intended to better reflect the medical, social, and practical realities of modern infertility evaluation and care. Final approval by the IIRRM Board of Directors was unanimous.
Kahn LG et al., 2026·JAMA Network Open·Free full text on PubMed Central
Increasing numbers of children are conceived using infertility treatment; concerns remain about potential effects on child neurodevelopment. To evaluate whether infertility treatment is associated with child neurodevelopment and whether such an association may be attributable to underlying subfecundity. DESIGN, SETTING, This cohort study was conducted among mother-child dyads in the National Institutes of Health Environmental Influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) Cohort, with infants conceived between 1998 and 2022. Associations of subfecundity and infertility treatment with neurodevelopmental outcomes were assessed among children ages 2 to 10 years. Data were analyzed from May 14, 2025, to March 31, 2026. Subfecundity was defined as prior consultation for, treatment of, or diagnosis of infertility for either partner; at least 2 prior miscarriages; or ever having had unprotected heterosexual intercourse for 12 months without conceiving. Infertility treatment was categorized as in vitro fertilization (IVF) or non-IVF treatment. Harmonized caregiver responses to the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire and the Child Behavior Checklist yielded continuous raw scores for externalizing and internalizing problems. The total raw Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) score quantified autism-like symptoms. Caregivers reported physician diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Among 15 382 mother-infant dyads, there were 14 191 unique maternal participants (mean [SD] age at delivery, 30.9 [5.33] years; 8780 parous participants [57.1%]). ASD and ADHD were diagnosed in 876 offspring (7.6%) and 819 offspring (7.1%), respectively. In generalized linear models, subfecundity was associated with higher externalizing problem and SRS scores among all pregnancies (externalizing problems: b = 0.47 [95% CI, 0.14-0.81]; SRS score: b = 1.08 [95% CI, 0.01-2.14]) and when restricted to natural conceptions (externalizing problems: b = 0.45 [95% CI, 0.07-0.83]; SRS score: b = 1.12 [95% CI, -0.09 to 2.34]). Offspring of parents with subfecundity had higher odds of ASD (overall: odds ratio [OR], 1.27 [95% CI, 1.03-1.57]; natural conceptions: OR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.04-1.64]). Children conceived via non-IVF treatment had higher odds of ADHD compared with those conceived via natural conception with subfecundity (OR, 1.77 [95% CI, 1.16-2.68]) or without subfecundity (OR, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.05-2.25]). There were no significant associations for IVF treatment. In this large US cohort study, subfecundity was associated with elevated scores for caregiver-reported symptoms of behavioral problems and higher odds of ASD diagnosis, independent of infertility treatment. Non-IVF treatment was associated with ADHD, warranting further research into specific indications for treatment that may increase risk of offspring neurodevelopmental problems.
Stanford JB et al., 2026·Frontiers in Reproductive Health·Free full text on PubMed Central
Background The total fertility rate (TFR) in most developed countries has been declining for decades. In the United States (U.S.), the total fertility rate has remained below replacement level since 2007. Subfertility affects at least 15% of women or couples over their reproductive lifespan and contributes to reduced TFR. Restorative reproductive medicine (RRM) is a medically based approach to subfertility care that can be delivered in primary care settings to increase live birth rates. Objective To estimate the theoretical impact of use of RRM among subfertile couples in the United States. Methods We conducted a simulation study. Model inputs included the number of women of reproductive age in the United States by 5-year age groups; current age-specific and total fertility rates; the proportion of women in each age group with subfertility; estimated spontaneous live birth rates among women with subfertility; and age-specific crude live birth rates with RRM treatment. We evaluated fifteen scenarios including sensitivity analyses: two different varying assumptions for spontaneous conception (25% vs. 50%), two levels of RRM utilization among subfertile women (20% vs. 50%), three different estimates of the number of subfertile women who would be potentially eligible for RRM treatment, and 4 different levels of effectiveness (live birth) from RRM treatment. Results The baseline TFR in the United States was 1.77 during 2015-2019, and 13.5% of women ages 20-44 were estimated to have subfertility. In a conservative scenario (50% spontaneous births; 20% RRM utilization; married women trying to conceive for at least 12 months, 20.7% RRM live births), the TFR increased to 1.79, representing a 1.0% relative increase (absolute +0.02). In an optimistic scenario (25% spontaneous births; 50% RRM utilization; all subfertile women), the TFR increased to 2.02, a 14.5% relative increase (absolute +0.26), approaching replacement-level fertility. Conclusion Simulation results suggest that expanding access to RRM within primary care settings could meaningfully increase the U.S. TFR, by reducing unresolved subfertility. Realizing this potential would require policy and health system changes to address workforce capacity, insurance coverage, and equitable access. These findings underscore the potential contribution of non-IVF fertility care pathways in addressing population-level fertility decline.
The existence of luteal phase defect has been the focus of much debate, mainly because of inconsistencies in its diagnosis and management. This study was performed to compare progesterone profiles in women with luteal phase defect with those of women with normal cycles and to establish a discriminatory level of serum progesterone that may aid in the diagnosis of this condition. Compared with patients with luteal phase defect cycles, women with normal cycles produced significantly more progesterone in the luteal phase. The serum progesterone level (less than or equal to 21 nmol/L) was the optimal discriminatory level between luteal phase defect and normal cycles and provided a diagnostic test with 70% sensitivity and 71% specificity. In women with recurrent abortion, the incidence of luteal phase defect was 40%, but with treatment 81% of pregnancies were successful. The findings in this study support the existence of luteal phase defect as a clinically significant entity in recurrent first-trimester spontaneous abortion and one that can be treated successfully with the administration of progesterone. The histologic diagnosis of luteal phase defect may also be confirmed with serum progesterone.
A preliminary study of 'screened' women with two consecutive miscarriages revealed an incidence of abortion in 47.4% in a subsequent pregnancy whilst hCG therapy in a similar group of women where biochemical monitoring with plasma progesterone suggested a potentially jeopardized pregnancy resulted in a continuing pregnancy in 92.3% of treated women. An urgent need for a true randomized double-blind evaluation of this therapy has been established in order to re-examine the therapeutic nihilism which currently pervades the management of women with recurrent abortion.
Pregnancy › Early Pregnancy › Progesterone Support · Reproductive Endocrinology › Ovarian Hormones › Progesterone · Therapeutics › Hormonal Agents › Progesterone and Progestins
Phil C Boyle, Paul A Carpentier, Joseph B Stanford
Philip Boyle, Phillip Boyle, P Boyle, P Carpentier, Joe Stanford, Joey Stanford, J Stanford
PMID 26962922 26962922 DOI 10.1056/NEJMc1600491 10.1056/NEJMc1600491 Carpentier et al. 2016, Carpentier 2016
Cite this article
Carpentier, P. A., Stanford, J. B., & Boyle, P. C. (2016). Progesterone in Women with Recurrent Miscarriages. The New England Journal of Medicine, 374(9), 894. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1600491
Carpentier PA, Stanford JB, Boyle PC. Progesterone in Women with Recurrent Miscarriages. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(9):894. doi:10.1056/NEJMc1600491
Carpentier, P. A., et al. "Progesterone in Women with Recurrent Miscarriages." The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 374, no. 9, 2016, pp. 894.